Bishop is regulated by no catholic law, the mode has differed materially in various ages and countries. In fact the election by a Dean and Chapter is as different from the method largely practised in the ancient Church (election by the people and clergy) as that now adopted formally in Ireland and virtually in England, nomination by the Prince. That it is, however, a legitimate method, the veriest Romanist must allow. It is notorious that the ancient Kings of France and Naples nominated to bishoprics as absolutely as the King of England to his Irish Sees. The real canonical requirement is ordination by the possessors of the apostolical succession, the laying on of hands and benediction of the Episcopate -a requirement which the Church of Ireland has clearly fulfilled.

"The only union then that was necessary, was that of a political kind. When, therefore, the kingdoms became politically one, and when the Lords Spiritual of Ireland became associated with those of England as the Parliamentary Representatives of the Church (which is avowedly but one of their two functions), the identification of the two Churches necessarily followed. Had the ancient Church of Scotland (I mean of course that of episcopal succession) been politically preserved, and its Spiritual Peers been transferred to the English House of Lords, it would in like manner have been politically one with the English Church, being already connected with it in Communion. It is even now united with the Church of England and Ireland as far as its spiritual relations are concerned; it is distinct only in the eye of the statute law and of the constitution. It

cannot be seriously questioned that the Sovereign, with the consent of the Parliaments of the two nations, was perfectly competent to alter the ancient designation of the National Church (always one in spirituals) when England and Ireland legally existed no longer. Especially when not a breath of reclamation was ever raised against this measure, forming an integral part of that most solemn Act of Union, of which the whole Church and State were cognisant. The Spiritual Lords of either country entirely assented. Not a single dissentient voice among the twelve thousand clergy was ever heard. And if this be not a recognition of this most patent Act, I do not know what Act is valid.

"I am quite aware that these are mere elementary maxims and trite facts, which every schoolboy of tolerable information ought to know. Unhappily, however, many who are legislators and statesmen have forgotten or neglected them. To judge of the Church of Ireland, and to condemn her upon the precipitate conclusion which some hasty reasoners and superficial readers have formed, is an absolute sin. It is a sin against the Head of the Church, whom in that despised and persecuted portion of His spiritual body they have presumed to contemn. It is an offence against charity, and, to take the very lowest ground, against justice and humanity. I would entreat such men, if these pages should happen to come within their notice, to review the question of the Irish Church but with half the deliberation and diligence which they are compelled to bestow on any question connected with their own private temporal affairs, or with the

secular interests of their country; and such is the native good sense and honesty of Englishmen, that I am sure no one sincere member of our Church would rise from the task but with a conviction that the Church in Ireland, still established by law, is the ancient Church of St. Patrick; that no other has any legitimate jurisdiction within that part of the realm; that she forms an integral part of the British Church; and that to maintain that integrity, to restore her mutilated frame-work, and her spiritual influence, is a duty to which the Legislature is bound by the solemn compact of the Act of Union, and the Sovereign by the most awful oaths in the presence of Him who is the Head of the Church, the King of Kings, the protector and destroyer of nations, and He to whom vengeance belongeth.

"It is well for the cause of the Church in Ireland, that the most substantial argument (and shadowy enough it is, after all,) that can be adduced against her, is one perfectly novel, gratuitous, and uncatholic, which must involve England equally with herself. I allude of course to the recent assertions, that in 1615, the Irish Synod committed itself to heretical Articles; that these Articles bind her still, and that England, by uniting herself in close intercommunion with Ireland, has been a partaker of her sin. It is thus fairly conceded, that the intercommunion is perfect, as it undoubtedly always has been. The assertions, however, are too contemptible to deserve a detailed notice. The Articles of 1615 were certainly strongly Calvinistic; but the charge of their being heretical, is as new as it is untenable. The Articles are obviously, as Mr. Palmer

remarks, based upon St. Augustine's doctrine. No article of the faith is impugned, nothing is taught, (however defective or redundant the peculiar statements may be considered in themselves) which the ancient Church would have considered as hindering Catholic communion. The onus probandi rests of course with those innovators who would make a definition, hitherto unknown, of heresy. If these Articles be heretical, à fortiori must the peculiar tenets of Romanism. Parity of reasoning must at least concede this. But though the temporary existence of a separate set of Articles for the two Churches was considered, during the term of their operation, as a thing extremely inconvenient, and wrong in itself, no English Churchman ever dreamed that the Irish Church of that day had cut herself off from Catholic communion. No English or Irish divine whatever has, up to the last year or two, maintained this. No one deserving the name of a divine, durst maintain it now. Let us look upon the perfect religious communion between both countries throughout the sixteenth century, and recall the names of Ussher, Bramhall, and Laud, and these very names ought to be an answer sufficient for any real English Churchman. As for the Articles of 1615 binding Irish Churchmen still, the idea is ridiculous. I will venture to say that not one man out of a hundred (and this is a large allowance,) who has received Orders in England or Ireland since the Restoration, has read these Articles; and that not a single individual, ordained in Ireland, has considered them as authoritative in any way. In the University of Dublin, the XXXIX Articles of the Church of England have always

formed an indispensable subject for the Divinity lectures, which candidates for Orders must attend. In the course of these lectures, I do not recollect the slightest allusion having ever been made to the Irish Articles. They were ipso facto annulled by the adoption of the English Articles, in 1634. So the Church has ever practically held: the contrary opinion of one or two Bishops of that time has been alleged, though not proved. But the private judgment of a few men could never overrule the mind of the Church, which on this point has been as practically explicit as it is possible to imagine.

"As for the union of these two branches of the Anglican Church, it is as perfect as total accordance in religious doctrine, and legal sanction, can make it. It is quite a different thing to assert, that the spirit of the legislative enactment has been practically carried out. The simple fact is, that the very reverse has been the case. Towards a perfect union, there ought to be a perfect reciprocity; but the reciprocity has been all on one side,' to use an expression, which, like all genuine Irish blunders, has a witty and real significance. By those to whom the prosperity of the United Church is dear, it ought to be considered dishonest to disguise this fact. And it is no wonder that those who know well the trials and hardships which the Irish clergy have with such exemplary patience undergone, who have witnessed the systematic discouragement, which has been, with very few exceptions, given to native genius, learning, and piety, and the total disregard shewn to the solemn Union of the two countries, it is no wonder that those who feel all this should